Why was Baylor selected instead of TCU
- Thread starter alaskaguy
- Start date
I end up posting this article about every year, but its a REALLY good read about the formation of the Big 12.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/MYSA081405_3N_SWCbaylor_tech_1ca3e1c_html8528.html
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/MYSA081405_3N_SWCbaylor_tech_1ca3e1c_html8528.html
Miami might be smaller than both...
I know the smallest D1 school (no football though) overall is Centenary with something like 1,000
Almost. I just looked it up, and it is around 15K. I was always under the impression that Miami was a big school.
The Big8 was right in taking A&M, and Texas.
Texas: 50,000 students, 100,000 capacity stadium, Austin, Public.
A&M: 48,000 students, 82,000 capacity stadium, College Station, Public.
Those were no brainers. What it boiled down to, was Tech, TCU, SMU, Baylor, Rice, Houston. Picking 2 schools from that to get to the 12 teams, is kinda tough.
Houston: 37,000 students, 32,000 capacity stadium, Houston. Public.
Tech: 30,000 students, 58,000 capacity stadium, Lubbock, Public.
Baylor: 14,000 students, 50,000 capacity stadium, Waco, Private.
SMU: 10,000 students, 30,000 capacity stadium, Dallas, Private.
TCU: 9,000 students, 44,000 capacity stadium, Fort Worth, Private>
Rice: 5,000 students, 70,000 capacity stadium, Houston, Private.
That said, I would have taken: Texas, A&M, Tech, Houston.
Big12 South:
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
Houston
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
But, having Baylor isn't that bad, at the time they were a pretty decent pick. I just think Houston would have been better.
Texas: 50,000 students, 100,000 capacity stadium, Austin, Public.
A&M: 48,000 students, 82,000 capacity stadium, College Station, Public.
Those were no brainers. What it boiled down to, was Tech, TCU, SMU, Baylor, Rice, Houston. Picking 2 schools from that to get to the 12 teams, is kinda tough.
Houston: 37,000 students, 32,000 capacity stadium, Houston. Public.
Tech: 30,000 students, 58,000 capacity stadium, Lubbock, Public.
Baylor: 14,000 students, 50,000 capacity stadium, Waco, Private.
SMU: 10,000 students, 30,000 capacity stadium, Dallas, Private.
TCU: 9,000 students, 44,000 capacity stadium, Fort Worth, Private>
Rice: 5,000 students, 70,000 capacity stadium, Houston, Private.
That said, I would have taken: Texas, A&M, Tech, Houston.
Big12 South:
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
Houston
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
But, having Baylor isn't that bad, at the time they were a pretty decent pick. I just think Houston would have been better.
It would have been nice to have the Dallas metro area represented in the Big12. Texas Christian would have been my #2 choice instead of Houston. IMO, Baylor and TCU are pretty interchangeable, institution wise.
if I hadn't heard this enough.
there's plenty of rumors, opinions, and half truths out there.
In the end, we were the best football school and had better fan support (and even still do) at the formation of the big12.
there's plenty of rumors, opinions, and half truths out there.
In the end, we were the best football school and had better fan support (and even still do) at the formation of the big12.
Admittedly, it's difficult to be a Baylor football fan these days. But may I please enlighten my BIG XII comrades in the differences between Baylor and TCU - pre-Big 12. I was a Baylor student from 1985-89 and a win over TCU was almost assured. In fact, they were scheduled as our homecoming date every year they played in Waco. (yes, I realize Baylor has taken that position in the Big XII).
Look at the last 12 Years of Southwest Conference (1983-1995)
Overall Record
Baylor 87-60-2 - that's 58% winning percentage
TCU 59-83-3 Frogs won just 41% of their games
Baylor went to 6 bowls. TCU just 2. And Baylor had a better record even though they played tougher teams. During this time, TCU played two (2!) Top 25 non conference opponents and Baylor played 12. During these last dozen years of the Southwest Conference, Baylor was ranked in Top 10 twice (1986 #9 and 1991 #8) and beat #3 USC in 1985.
Not one time during the last dozen years of the SWC, did TCU finish with a better league record than Baylor.
Baylor vs TCU Series (head to head)
Baylor had 9 wins. TCU 4.
Average Home Attendance for Baylor/TCU game
in Waco 37,267; in Fort Worth 26,593
40% more @ Baylor home games for series.
Surely, there wouldn't be any question at all about which team would be picked to go to the Big XII. Horned Frog Bubble Buster But bottom line, 40% more people in seats makes a big difference.
When the decision was announced, I gulped and thought, great, now we get to add OU, OSU, Nebraska, Iowa St, etc, all of whom have better programs than Rice, TCU, SMU & Houston. No more walk-in-the-park games on Saturday.
I believe what we have is an illustration of the old "success breeds success" cliched theory. TCU, who has been in, what, three different conferences since 1995 has not played the caliber of teams that Iowa St and Baylor have to play every year.
Add that to having a little luck (Franchione leaving) and some smarts (promoting Patterson) and this all helped to get TCU some wins, bowl games and nat'l exposure. This often = better recruits and more victories in the future.
I struggle with the conundrum of whether I'd like to
CM
Look at the last 12 Years of Southwest Conference (1983-1995)
Overall Record
Baylor 87-60-2 - that's 58% winning percentage
TCU 59-83-3 Frogs won just 41% of their games
Baylor went to 6 bowls. TCU just 2. And Baylor had a better record even though they played tougher teams. During this time, TCU played two (2!) Top 25 non conference opponents and Baylor played 12. During these last dozen years of the Southwest Conference, Baylor was ranked in Top 10 twice (1986 #9 and 1991 #8) and beat #3 USC in 1985.
Not one time during the last dozen years of the SWC, did TCU finish with a better league record than Baylor.
Baylor vs TCU Series (head to head)
Baylor had 9 wins. TCU 4.
Average Home Attendance for Baylor/TCU game
in Waco 37,267; in Fort Worth 26,593
40% more @ Baylor home games for series.
Surely, there wouldn't be any question at all about which team would be picked to go to the Big XII. Horned Frog Bubble Buster But bottom line, 40% more people in seats makes a big difference.
When the decision was announced, I gulped and thought, great, now we get to add OU, OSU, Nebraska, Iowa St, etc, all of whom have better programs than Rice, TCU, SMU & Houston. No more walk-in-the-park games on Saturday.
I believe what we have is an illustration of the old "success breeds success" cliched theory. TCU, who has been in, what, three different conferences since 1995 has not played the caliber of teams that Iowa St and Baylor have to play every year.
Add that to having a little luck (Franchione leaving) and some smarts (promoting Patterson) and this all helped to get TCU some wins, bowl games and nat'l exposure. This often = better recruits and more victories in the future.
I struggle with the conundrum of whether I'd like to
- be crying about how I don't get any respect in football for beating San Diego State, Colorado State and UNLV (and forgetting to note that they've only won the MWC title one time). OR
- Struggle in football in the Big 12 like my Baylor Bears do.
CM
Last edited:
Except for the fact that Baylor sells more tickets to football games and can compete in other Big 12 sports as well.
The 34 Big 12 Conference titles (tied with OU for 4th place in # of titles) is five more than the 29 titles Baylor earned in 81 years of Southwest Conference membership. Over the last six academic years (2003-04 through 2008-09), Baylor has won a combined 25 Big 12 regular-season and tournament championships in five different sports, which ranks second behind Texas' 44 titles over that period.
Baylor has had two national championship team titles since the Big12 started, which double the number of KU, KSU, ISU, Mizzou and TTech combined. Yes, you're right. We haven't won one in Football...trust me, I live in Texas, and know this. But to suggest replacing Baylor because they are not competitive in the Big12 is just not accurate.
